Why might some organizations choose to use an interview over any of the predictors we have discussed so far? To what extent do most organizations utilize a “structured” interview?
I wonder about the individual differences in interviewing skills. What makes people good interviewers? How can people improve their interview skills? Can people "fake-it" in interviews much like they can on certain personality and integrity tests?
I think interviews, as problematic as they can be, are an important part of the selection system. Whether I was an applicant or a manager doing the hiring, I would want a chance to "eye ball" the other person. It does seem, however, that hiring procedures can be valid AND respectful of the fact that they contain social elements that are important to applicants and the other stakeholders, such as customers, organizational members, shareholders, and members of the community. What are some ways of keeping the process from feeling sterile and cold while also maximizing validity?
Is it necessary or vital to just always use a structured or partially structured interview? I recall it is legally required or I might be confused from the readings of last week. But if it wasn't required legally, then as Vicki said how is this criteria more valuable than the other we have bench-marked so far?
I think more so than anything, companies choose to interview because it helps them feel safer. I think impressions go along way. Have you ever heard of someone getting hired for a job without being interviewed?
I've been thinking about how much time we spend on interviews in my work. I think if we are up-front, we realize the main purpose for interviews in some of our programs is for 'recruitment' and buy-in. In this case, less structure seems appropirate.
Why might some organizations choose to use an interview over any of the predictors we have discussed so far? To what extent do most organizations utilize a “structured” interview?
ReplyDeleteI wonder about the individual differences in interviewing skills. What makes people good interviewers? How can people improve their interview skills? Can people "fake-it" in interviews much like they can on certain personality and integrity tests?
ReplyDeleteI think interviews, as problematic as they can be, are an important part of the selection system. Whether I was an applicant or a manager doing the hiring, I would want a chance to "eye ball" the other person. It does seem, however, that hiring procedures can be valid AND respectful of the fact that they contain social elements that are important to applicants and the other stakeholders, such as customers, organizational members, shareholders, and members of the community. What are some ways of keeping the process from feeling sterile and cold while also maximizing validity?
ReplyDeleteIs it necessary or vital to just always use a structured or partially structured interview? I recall it is legally required or I might be confused from the readings of last week. But if it wasn't required legally, then as Vicki said how is this criteria more valuable than the other we have bench-marked so far?
ReplyDeleteI think more so than anything, companies choose to interview because it helps them feel safer. I think impressions go along way. Have you ever heard of someone getting hired for a job without being interviewed?
ReplyDeleteI've been thinking about how much time we spend on interviews in my work. I think if we are up-front, we realize the main purpose for interviews in some of our programs is for 'recruitment' and buy-in. In this case, less structure seems appropirate.
ReplyDelete